This petition challenged a compassionate appointment granted to a grandson. The court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the petitioner failed to exhaust remedies by not approaching the authorities first.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WPS No. 27 of 2011
---- Petitioner
Versus
---- Respondents
| For Petitioner | Shri Parag Kotecha, Advocate. |
|---|---|
| For Respondent/State | Shri Satish Gupta, Govt. Advocate. |
Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy
Order On Board
12/02/2016
2
Sd/(P.Sam Koshy)
JUDGE
inder
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner was justified in directly invoking writ jurisdiction under Article 226 without exhausting the remedy of raising the claim before the relevant authorities.
Whether the petitioner has made out a sufficient case to challenge the compassionate appointment granted to Respondent No.4.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ramji
State of Chhattisgarh through Secretary Tribal Department, DKS Bhawan, Raipur
Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Development, Kanker
Collector, District Kanker
Kamalkant Yadav
P. Sam Koshy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
